Banner ad

Sunday, December 07, 2008

Debunking a Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory

On today, the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, there are still many conspiracy theorists who believe, as do those who think that 9/11 was an inside job either conducted by the Bush administration or allowed to go on without blocking it, that FDR's administration knew ahead of time about the Japanese attack and either allowed it to take place or just delayed reaction in time to protect the people and ships in Pearl Harbor. Today, there is new information that knocks down one of the pillars holding up that conspiracy theory.
It has remained one of World War II’s most enduring mysteries, one that resonated decades later after Sept. 11: Who in Washington knew what and when before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941?

Specifically, who heard or saw a transcript of a Tokyo shortwave radio news broadcast that was interrupted by a prearranged coded weather report? The weather bulletin signaled Japanese diplomats around the world to destroy confidential documents and codes because war with the United States, the Soviet Union or Britain was beginning.

In testimony for government inquiries, witnesses said that the “winds execute” message was intercepted as early as Dec. 4, three days before the attack.

But after analyzing American and foreign intelligence sources and decrypted cables, historians for the National Security Agency concluded in a documentary history released last week that whatever other warnings reached Washington about the attack, the “winds execute” message was not one of them.
Or course, such evidence will not convince those who enjoy hugging their theories and who refuse to believe that sometimes vast bureaucracies make mistakes and our enemies take advantage of them. It's much easier it seems for them to blame a conspiracy than to accept what actually happened. If the Pearl Harbor theories have lasted this long, we can't expect the 9/11 or Kennedy conspiracies to go away any time soon.

5 comments:

kenny's sideshow said...

Betsy,
Can the NYT's 'stories' really be considered a reliable source for debunking anything?

Pat Patterson said...

Maybe it was all a public relations scheme by one of Jack London's publishers trying to celebrate a book reissue with The Yellow Peril included.

Bill B. said...

There's not much mileage in trashing the NYT when it prints a story you disagree with.

The NYT is not perfect (the most significant recent failure was when it reprinted all the Bush/Cheney propaganda, to trick Americans into supporting an unjustified war), but it usually right, and trying hard to do a better job. It fired the execrable Judy Miller for example.

Dr Weevil said...

There's not much mileage in trashing a blogger when she prints a post you disagree with, but Bill Biddle does it over and over and over, and does it under more than one name. Anyone else would have been at least a little bit ashamed to be caught posting as Bill B. and Jawbone at the same time, but not our Bill. What's that all about?

Bill B. said...

What are you babbling about, Michael?